How did the Romanian adoptees fare? Better than those left behind.

From a Romanian charity, see below

How did the Romanian children who were adopted by wealthier families in the West compare to those who were raised in institutions?

One of the complicated issues of international adoption is whether are children are better off being adopted into a foreign culture, thousands of miles from their original habitat, or left to grow up in institutions in their native country--if homes cannot be found for them there. Most often the institutions that would-be adoptive parents visit are gruesome hell holes; yet we do know that in a great many cases, the operators of these institutions keep them that way exactly to extract as much money as possible from horrified people of good will. Even when given the money to fix up the orphanage, the operators leave them as is to extract more money from visitors. And we know from reports from other countries, such as China and Nepal and Guatemala, that children are stolen to keep those institutions full of "orphans" to be sold to Americans.

It's a never ending cycle. That children were unconscionably warehoused in Romania during the Ceausescu (pronounced Chow-chess-cu) years, as we wrote about in the previous post, is without question, and surely, unless sold to be a slave or to be used sexually, it is better to grow up in relative comfort far away from home than be left to flounder in an institution.


Now there is data that confirms this. According to the authors of Romania's Abandoned Children, children who found homes with families abroad had higher brain development, and were more able to fully function in the world than those left behind. Yet the transition was not easy. Children who were institutionalized for any length of time--two, three years--had a difficult period of adjustment--often as long as they had been institutionalized, or longer.

NEGATIVE EFFECT OF BEING WARHOUSED
The study found that the IQs of children placed in foster care prior to turned two were significantly higher than the IQs of children placed after age two. As the researchers, at Harvard and the Bucharest Early Intervention Project, continue their research, the ill effects of institutionalization and abandonment continue to appear--even in children adopted as early as one. The problems likely stem largely from the lack of attachment and sensory deprivation in the early months, or years, of life.

When raised in homes--foster or adoptive--children do better on IQ tests, have greater attachment to caregivers, exhibit less anxiety and depression, better facility with language, and show increased brain activity. Yet even those who by all appearances seem successfully adopted and integrated into their new societies face difficult struggles.

Undoing the effects of stunted development is not a simple matter of giving these children tender loving care. They've never had it, and thus they initially do not know how to react to TLC. Used to little human contact, that is what they initially prefer--just as the new care-givers think the opposite must be true. Because they were washed by putting them under cold water, they are afraid of baths. They relate to strangers quickly, but have a hard time forming attachments to their adoptive parents and any siblings in . They may have night terrors--for years. Their language skills may be poor. They are afraid to be outside because they spent so little or no time outside before. Poor nutrition of the mother during pregnancy may have left them mentally deficient. Anyone taking on such a child must be willing to work hard, and patiently to help these kids accommodate to their new surroundings and situation.

THOSE LEFT BEHIND...
Some children who age out of the institutional system do manage to find purpose in their lives and hold jobs--but they are often embarrassed to admit they were one of the "worker bees" born during the Ceausescu regime. They are likely not to tell friends or employers for fear of being shunned or fired. However, many who aged out of the institutions, end up homeless and largely uneducated, with no family or connections, and struggle to make a life.

Lorraine

Since the early 1990s, several NGOs have worked to close down the larger institutions and get the children into foster-care like homes, employing "maternal assistants" to take care of the children. The most recent data shows that there are more than 20,000 such children living in foster care. Those who take the children get the equivalent of $200 a month for their care, a fee that is roughly the salaries of some teachers and nurses. In rural areas, foster parenting is one of the few jobs available, and those who study the situation say many who foster children do it more for the money than the love of children.

Romania ended international adoption in 2001, finally outlawing it entirely in 2005 under pressure from the European Union as the country made its successful bid to enter the EU. At the time, rumors swirled of children being sold at auction, and Romanian officials said that they did not have the resources to shut down the process. Today, Romanians who want to adopt are largely people who cannot have children on their own, and most, like the rest of the world, want a child under five. Few are willing to adopt a child of Roma (Gypsy) descent, which rules out a large percentage of children in the institutions today.

AN ENTRENCHED MENTALITY 

The legacy of the brutal Ceausescu years lingers on. Putting the needs of the children first, reconnecting them with their biological families or finding them other loving homes would require a change in the social mentality of the Romanians. At the time women were forced to have children, they did not really understand what they were getting into when they dropped them off at institutions. The poor remain uneducated about birth control and, even if they know about it,  the costs are prohibitive. And there is a lingering belief that full-time childcare--for a year, for five years, or more--is still a service offered by the state.

Yes, it's a mess. Large scale social policies that dictate "rules" about having children (as once in Romania) or not have them (as in China) tend to create greater problems than they solve. Any country that offers its children as a major export product (China, Guatemala, Romania, Ethiopia, South Korea) is rife with corruption. Make no mistake, children are trafficked. But to be raised in an institution rather than in a home with parents who want you? There is really no debate. A home is always better.

Yesterday, I ended the post remembering the little Romanian adoptee I met one Christmas Eve in Sag Harbor, and wondering how she fared. After reading this material I am aware more than ever that she, adopted by a single woman, almost certainly had a better life than if had grown up in Romania. But it is also likely that she was not a true orphan when she was adopted, and has family back in Romania who may be wondering if their child had truly died, as they were told. She was merely one of the cogs that got caught up in Ceausescu's insanity.

While there are many fewer children living in institutions today in Romania than during the Ceausescu regime, the country--a quarter of a century later--has not recovered from the damage of his severe and unforgiving policies. Adopted or not, the children are the ones who are paying the price.--lorraine 
_____________________
To donate to a Romanian charity, see Aid for Romanian Children  (the initial picture above is from their website.

SOURCES
Orphaned by History: A Child Welfare Crisis in Romania
The lost children
FROM FMF 
Adopted from Romania, told her mother was dead, reunited via Facebook

TO READ
Romania's Abandoned Children: Deprivation, Brain Development, and the Struggle for Recovery
by Charles A, Nelson, Nathan A. Fox and Charles H. Zeanah
"The implications of early experience for children's brain development, behavior, and psychological functioning have long absorbed caregivers, researchers, and clinicians. The 1989 fall of Romania's Ceausescu regime left approximately 170,000 children in 700 overcrowded, impoverished institutions across Romania, and prompted the most comprehensive study to date on the effects of institutionalization on children's well-being." --Amazon

The Tip Jar 
by Viorica Culea

"Follow one young woman's real life journey from infancy in a horrific Romanian orphanage, to the broken promise of a loving adoptive family. Her new life with her adoptive parents turns into a nightmare of drunken rage and hostility towards she and her heritage. As she discovers where she is from, she decides to reconnect with her roots and seek out her natural family, still living in Romania." --Amazon